There has been a marked shift in African historical knowledge and teaching since the turn of the millennium. Compare the absolute reliance of students on the revered knowledge of professors and authors up to the 1980s with the wide range and diversity of ideas and opinions that now populate historical scholarship. While it is easy to blame postmodernism and postcolonial deconstructions for what many see as disruptions to historical scholarship, they reveal the need to overcome the power of many uninterrogated claims that previously passed for historical knowledge. From the ashes of this uncertain moment must evolve a new historiography capable of producing more accurate historical accounts. Conscious of the power and imperialism of dominant knowledge, such accounts may yield a more complete picture of African historical experience. This is no mean task (as current researchers can attest). It must begin with a fresh look at historical sources. As digitalization makes archives more accessible, so too has the demand risen for teachers and students alike to fully substantiate the historical claims they make. Yet historical sources are varied and often scattered, and it is difficult to determine what source applies or may be discounted. This dilemma mainly explains the increasing number of anthological volumes of primary sources now being published. By redirecting scholars and students to original writings, these ontologies anticipate the methodological innovations capable of producing more accurate historical interpretations.
Gregory Smulewicz-Zucker's anthology brings together many scattered works relating to the subject of emancipation in Africa. It includes the political thoughts, ideologies and reflections expressed by Africa's political elites, nationalist organizations and political parties (p. xv), which the editor states are crucial to understanding the political trajectories of emancipation and independence. The actors whose writings and ideas are included here will pass for a who's who of modern history, nationalism and postcolonial state building in Africa. Collectively, the book is a veritable handbook of political thoughts and statements on the origins and challenges of the modern state system across the continent.
Organized chronologically and thematically in four parts, the introductory part comprises writings that reveal how an evolving African elite, including Samuel Crowther, James Africanus Horton and Edward Blyden, interpreted their social and political conditions to generate ideas about emancipation from the mid-nineteenth century to the early twentieth century. Marcus Garvey is a surprising addition to this section because, unlike the more locally based intellectuals, his ideas were more transregional and revolutionary. As this part serves as a background to the book's main focus on nationalism and independence, the addition of Marcus Garvey by the editor raises concerns about his conceptualization of the intellectual roots of modern Africa. Garvey's vision of a global blackism transcended independence from colonialism, which was the main concern of continental intellectuals.
Part Two comprises various articulations of self-determination by nationalists, and their understandings about the end of colonial rule and the form that new states would take. A few articles stand out. Excerpts from George Padmore's book (p. 47) challenge common assumptions that Ghana's Kwame Nkrumah surrounded himself with communist intellectuals and advisers. This avowed communist in fact advocated Pan-Africanism and cooperation as the preferred strategy of emancipation and development for African states, while cautioning against the duplicity of American imperialism. If the purpose of this section is to capture how African leaders imagined and planned for the postcolonial state, Charles de Gaulle's statement (pp. 55–7) that sought to redirect Guinea away from its vote for total independence towards a proposed Franco-African Community stands out as a sore thumb. Similarly, the inclusion of Hendrik Verwoerd's racialist ‘Response to Harold Macmillan's “Wind of Change” Speech, 1960’ contradicts the book's claim to be a narrative of African emancipation, especially when placed beside the thoughts of Patrice Lumumba (pp. 83–6) and Sekou Touré.
The remaining parts are devoted to expressions of the challenges of nation building and development. Julius Nyerere's ‘ujamaa’, Senghor's ‘African Socialist Humanism’ (pp. 241–6), Nkrumah's ‘Consciencism’ and Kanaka Mutesa II's Mind of Bugandaí were not simply narratives of emancipation; they are more appropriate as celebrations of nationhood and as ideologies of identity and political mobilization behind the new states. Even centrifugal statements by Danquah (pp. 251–4) and Ojukwu's ‘Ahiara Declaration’ should not be read as reversions of emancipation, but rather as discourses and debates of nation building.
The meanings and themes of African emancipation are as yet unresolved. This ontology promises to re-energize the debates and will be valuable for class discussions and scholarly seminars. Readers will have to determine whether Africa has always been – and remains – in an endless struggle against domination, as this book claims. They will have to resolve what statements and intellectual thoughts ought to fit into an ontology of African political ideas, and which should be excluded. Readers must also resolve the author's criticism of postcolonial theory over whether ‘racism … colonialism and imperialism are embedded in European Intellectual traditions’ (p. xiv). Smulewicz-Zucker's claim that African intellectuals ‘extracted’ emancipation ideas from Europe racializes ‘freedom’ as though it belongs to Europe and was alien to Africa. As such, the main strength of this collection is the scholarly debates it promises to unleash.
